Challenges to a robust walk-on program in 2017

Old Nebraska Guy said:
I heard AD BM on the radio Wednesday night where he actually mention this, IRCC he used the term "squad list", I would say "roster spot".  I think Title IX is worded something like " athletic opportunities" so roster spots would count no matter whether financial aid is involved.  I do recall that roster spots do not have to be equal but must match the male/female ratio in the general student population.  Which actually is creating a problem because  because more and more women are going to college and the ratio is constantly changing in favor of the women. I am going to actually count the number of people on the roster of the various teams and see what we have.  For example there are more than 50 women listed on the track and field team.

Personally, I think 45-50 walk-on's would be ideal.  They would mainly be practice fodder, but it would allow the players on the three deep, the ones who would play on Saturday, to get live reps against people while running their offense/defense.   During the fall your time is spent getting ready for your next opponent.  Breaking down the numbers, 85 scholarships, four deep offense and defense.  The 4's are the practice squad. They provide the opponent's plays and defensive looks for the 1's.  Without more walk-on's the 3's have to play the opponent's for the 2's therefore the 3's get no reps of our plays and sets or if the switch roles they get half of the 2's reps.  With 20 more walk-on's the 2's have their own practice squad and the 3's stand around therefore, 45-50 walk-on's would be ideal.  When I say live reps I don't mean "tackle to the ground" just cases where you need opponents that run and react to what you are doing.

Husker56 beat me to the post.  Some good info there.
Click to expand...
FYI - the walk on program for the last ten years has had around 50 walkons on the roster.  Riley just this season had 135 total athletes on the team, and not all 85 scholarships were filled, so that is 50 plus walkons this year.

 
...reading the comments, it seems many folks are missing the mark on why and how the past walk on program worked for Osborne..

..many have posted comments along the lines and premise of  “harder to get players that could get scholarships somewhere else”..

..that’s exactly the area Osborne and McBride excelled in..spotting talent, and specifically un recruitments talent..example, Jared Tomich, he was not recruited out of HS, however Osborne amd McBride and theor insane level of intuition got him in as a walk on...amd if your 40 or older you know how Jared Tomich developed..and where he ended up..NFL..

there were about 31 NFL players that went un recruited out of HS and went Huskers via walk on program..

..that’s the key, Frost and company has to have the calibrated eyeball to spot young men that are not recruited...Time will tell if he can do. I’m persuaded that skill in its entirety can’t be taught..

..also, I observe folks have a way of propagating ideas and things they heard someone else say, without their own cerebral thought put to what they propagating..and what I hear often is many say “how much college football has changed.”...premise...really..? I know all about the scholarship changes by the NCAA and other minutia...however the game has NOT changed my friends..then field is same length and width, still block tackle, run and catch..

..I’m so sick of hearing the i formation and/or Osborne type offense wouldn’t work in today’s “sophisticated “ CFB world..it blows my mind someone could throw out such a definitive statement based on absolutely nothing but ambiguity ideas...

..I’m persuaded now is the perfect time to run that type offensive plan..that’s a different topic

i got sidetracked..it boils down to what no staff has done well at since Osborne left, and that’s develop athletes, that  will decided how much and to what extent the walk on programs helps.

 
Outside of the scholarship issue, I think the biggest problem is this: quality.

I feel this gets lost in the weeds far too often. T.O. and his staff were so talented and managed their system so well that they could take a not-so-talented Nebraska kid and turn him into an All-American. I feel confident saying many of the kids they took were not diamonds in the rough with incredible potential. There's a reason a lot of those kids were ignored by bigger programs.

T.O. had the system, the know-how and the years of depth building to make it all possible. It also didn't hurt that high school programs around the state were running variations of T.O.'s offense.

Being a winner also helps. If Frost can turn the program around and reshape the Monday through Friday system (which I think will be one of the most significant changes he implements as a coach) then I feel confident saying the walk-on program could be primed to have a bigger role than recent decades.

 
Depressed Husker said:
...reading the comments, it seems many folks are missing the mark on why and how the past walk on program worked for Osborne..

..many have posted comments along the lines and premise of  “harder to get players that could get scholarships somewhere else”..

..that’s exactly the area Osborne and McBride excelled in..spotting talent, and specifically un recruitments talent..example, Jared Tomich, he was not recruited out of HS, however Osborne amd McBride and theor insane level of intuition got him in as a walk on...amd if your 40 or older you know how Jared Tomich developed..and where he ended up..NFL..

there were about 31 NFL players that went un recruited out of HS and went Huskers via walk on program..

..that’s the key, Frost and company has to have the calibrated eyeball to spot young men that are not recruited...Time will tell if he can do. I’m persuaded that skill in its entirety can’t be taught..

..also, I observe folks have a way of propagating ideas and things they heard someone else say, without their own cerebral thought put to what they propagating..and what I hear often is many say “how much college football has changed.”...premise...really..? I know all about the scholarship changes by the NCAA and other minutia...however the game has NOT changed my friends..then field is same length and width, still block tackle, run and catch..

..I’m so sick of hearing the i formation and/or Osborne type offense wouldn’t work in today’s “sophisticated “ CFB world..it blows my mind someone could throw out such a definitive statement based on absolutely nothing but ambiguity ideas...

..I’m persuaded now is the perfect time to run that type offensive plan..that’s a different topic

i got sidetracked..it boils down to what no staff has done well at since Osborne left, and that’s develop athletes, that  will decided how much and to what extent the walk on programs helps.
Click to expand...


Tomich maybe isn't the best example to use.  He was a walk-on only because he was a Prop 48 which largely killed any recruiting interest he had coming out of HS.

 
Enhance said:
Outside of the scholarship issue, I think the biggest problem is this: quality.

I feel this gets lost in the weeds far too often. T.O. and his staff were so talented and managed their system so well that they could take a not-so-talented Nebraska kid and turn him into an All-American. I feel confident saying many of the kids they took were not diamonds in the rough with incredible potential. There's a reason a lot of those kids were ignored by bigger programs.

T.O. had the system, the know-how and the years of depth building to make it all possible. It also didn't hurt that high school programs around the state were running variations of T.O.'s offense.

Being a winner also helps. If Frost can turn the program around and reshape the Monday through Friday system (which I think will be one of the most significant changes he implements as a coach) then I feel confident saying the walk-on program could be primed to have a bigger role than recent decades.
Click to expand...


I think you really hit the nail on the head Enhance in regards to the offensive system.  I graduated HS in the late 90s and it seemed like half the teams we played against ran some kind of option or veer scheme, my team personally did a mix of wishbone and I formation.  If the high schools can somewhat align in terms of running a similar offensive system of what Frost does (which I know is significantly easier said than done) than we might start to see Nebraska have a resurgence in local O-linemen as they've already been coached on some of the concepts.

 
Xmas32 said:
I think you really hit the nail on the head Enhance in regards to the offensive system.  I graduated HS in the late 90s and it seemed like half the teams we played against ran some kind of option or veer scheme, my team personally did a mix of wishbone and I formation.  If the high schools can somewhat align in terms of running a similar offensive system of what Frost does (which I know is significantly easier said than done) than we might start to see Nebraska have a resurgence in local O-linemen as they've already been coached on some of the concepts.
Click to expand...


I would think that Frost's system (simplified) would work well in Nebraska HS football.  There are big linemen in Nebraska, just not every team has a full line of them.  So, I would think that a more spread out offense would work with teams that have good athletes, just not a big over powering line.  It would benefit the good athletes that teams have.

I'm told that it's a relatively simple system also.  It's not like a bunch of rout trees and rout options that you have to be next to an NFL QB to understand.  So, the limited practice time HSs have could make this work.

 
BigRedBuster said:
I would think that Frost's system (simplified) would work well in Nebraska HS football.  There are big linemen in Nebraska, just not every team has a full line of them.  So, I would think that a more spread out offense would work with teams that have good athletes, just not a big over powering line.  It would benefit the good athletes that teams have.

I'm told that it's a relatively simple system also.  It's not like a bunch of rout trees and rout options that you have to be next to an NFL QB to understand.  So, the limited practice time HSs have could make this work.
Click to expand...
Bellevue West runs a basic version of the Frost offense, and they have been one of the best NE high school teams in the past few years.  Matt Turman's dad, who coaches at Wahoo-Neumann basically said that he think's Frost's offense is great, and would probably switch to it, but he's too old to do it (ha!!!)

 
HerbieHancock said:
I was listening to the Ringer's GM Street this past week, and they brought up SF at Nebraska. Mike Lombardi started talking about the walk on program back when TO was HC, and basically said their walk on's had financial funding for college through sponsorships from different entities (not being the university) in the state. Any knowledge about this or is Lombardi just blowing smoke ?
Click to expand...
Just BS.   Just like the legendary "county scholarships' that NU once upon a time was noted for that said that every one of Nebraska's 93 counties sent their best football player to NU on a scholarship to represent the county.   Never happened but it was about as widely believed as Trump Russia collusion.  LOL

The walk on program is going to have to be limited or it will return to what it was under Frank as opposed to what it was in the 60 and 70s and 80s.   College at UNL was not nearly as expensive back then relative to wages etc.  People's living standards the past decade have just plummeted and living paycheck to paycheck (plus a credit card balance still climbing)  has to change if you are going to find 90 good football players to walk on to NU when there are many good colleges that will provide scholarship aid.  Solich kept up the numbers but he had to let guys walk on who had absolutely no chance of ever being a D1 level football player.  There is no sense in having that many if they are not capable of contributing.  Wasting their time and the time of other players and coaches too - and they cost money to outfit, medicate, etc.  Not to mention the TITLE 9 discrimination issues.   

The solution is to allow women to be eligible to play football.  Then the numbers will not be a problem.   I don't think the number of women matter but that they are able to participate.  We could form a women's rugby team or mud wrestling would be popular.  (basically water down the rugby field before every game and u got the best of both).  lol 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
their walk on's had financial funding for college through sponsorships from different entities (not being the university) in the state.
Click to expand...



You mean like doing autograph signings for money?  :)

It seems obvious that cost of education is the real factor undermining a walk on program (and the reason I think we saw the Maverick program disbanded... same with a successful wrestling program).  Are you going to rack up to $80k or more in debt, for just a CHANCE to earn a scholarship?  Or go to another non power 5 school, with a full scholarship... so you can be guaranteed to be prepared for and go on to your lucrative non-football career later on, debt free.

Best you can hope for is to find a talented kid with a relatively affluent family behind them.

 


The practice issue is so, so, SO important to the development of these kids.  A walk-on isn't going to develop and prove what he can do by watching everyone else practice.

 
Crazy sad to think how we've deviated from what worked and squandered one of our resources for so long. I suppose this all started under BC and it will take a coach that played in the old era to get things back to where they should be. Had we hired anyone but SF, this probably would have continued forever.

 
Everyone talks about taking a "free education" over a walk on.  My kid got neither option so I sent her to a school that gave her the best opportunity to get a degree that would lead to a long term career that repaid her education.

If my second gets a scholarship offer to play at some D-II school, I'm not going to just jump on the offer because it's free.  I'm going to see if they have any degrees with long term prospects.  There's no reason to waste her time on a free education at a smaller school if it provides a worthless degree in the long run.  Just so the University can pad it's Title IX numbers.  I'd rather her chase a worthwhile degree even if that meant passing up scholarship offers or the chance to walk on.  Life is too short to waste time getting a free social justice degree from a D-II school before figuring out you may need to go back and get a STEM degree from a larger University for real life stuff.

This is where I think college athletics falls on its face all too often.  Even with scholarship players, who may think it's a stepping stone to an NFL payday or a free education.  Nebraska is better then most universities at focusing on degrees and careers and life goals outside of sports, but they aren't totally immune to the scholarship player getting a degree in underwater basket weaving.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top